【作者】 余文海；

【导师】 冯果；

【作者基本信息】 武汉大学 ， 民商法， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 交强险受害第三人直接请求权(以下简称“交强险直接请求权”)系指交通事故的受害第三人,作为交强险合同外的第三人,依据交强险法律和行政法规的规定直接对保险人享有的保险补偿请求权。交强险直接请求权是交强险制度中不可或缺的核心内容,只有赋予受害第三人直接请求权才能真正实现其保护受害第三人的立法宗旨。遗憾的是,我国现行《保险法》、《机动车交通事故强制责任保险条例》都未赋予受害第三人直接请求权。立法上的缺陷导致司法实践中执法标准的混乱,常常会出现同一案件事实两种以上的不同判决结果,严重损害司法权威。有鉴如此,以交强险直接请求权为题对交强险制度进行系统研究具有重要的理论和实践意义。本文以交强险直接请求权为核心,沿着“权利价值——权利性质——权利主体——权利行使——权利救济”这样一个逻辑思路分为五章展开论述,在借鉴发达国家和地区的交强险立法经验基础上,坚持理论与实践相结合,立法与司法相比较,对我国交强险直接请求权有关理论问题进行了研究,并尝试对完善我国交强险立法提出建议。第一章论述了赋予交强险直接请求权的必要性。任意责任保险严守分离原则,坚持损害赔偿责任关系与责任保险关系相互脱离,是以保护被保险人为中心保险制度体系；而交强险是以保护受害第三人为中心的保险制度体系,交强险是脱离分离原则的窠臼,并承载着以保护受害第三人利益为己任的新的保险制度,实现了从理论基础到立法技术上的变革。在强化受害第三人保护方面,各个国家和地区立法在尝试了各种可能的选择之后,最终都选择赋予受害第三人直接请求权。研究交强险直接请求权产生与确立的过程发现：责任保险社会管理功能的加强,为赋予交强险直接请求权提供了可能；合同相对性原理的合理修正,丰富和发展了为第三人利益的合同理论,同时也为赋予交强险直接请求权奠定了坚实的法理基础；责任保险的发展进化,强调保护受害第三人利益,体现以人为本的理念,成为确立交强险直接请求权的必然选择。如果不赋予受害第三人直接请求权,其合法利益难以得到应有的保护,其保险索赔成本会大大增加,索赔过程会更漫长,同时也破坏交强险制度的完整性。赋予交强险直接请求权,能保证交通事故受害人能够得到及时救治,能充分发挥交强险制度的及时救济功能,能进一步体现直接请求权的公平、效率和安全的法律价值。第二章分析论证了直接请求权的法律性质。交强险直接请求权性质上有三种不同的观点：独立性质说、侵权损害请求权说和保险补偿请求权说。鉴于受害第三人直接请求权以损害赔偿请求权为基础和起点,并通过交强险合同最终实现,其性质上应属于保险补偿请求权。交强险直接请求权以损害赔偿责任为前提,以损害赔偿范围为归依,具有寄生性。其与损害赔偿请求权竞合时,应优先得到满足。直接请求权是保险补偿请求权,应受保险合同约束,保险人理应依法享有抗辩权,其与保险补偿请求权竞合时,应优先得到满足,但被保险人优先于保险人全部或者部分履行损害赔偿义务时,被保险人仍享有保险补偿请求权,但是,二者请求的总和应以责任险额为限。第三章讨论了直接请求权主体问题。直接请求权主体就是受害第三人,受害第三人是“受害人”和“第三人”的结合体。目前我国交强险只保护车下人员,对于车上人员未纳入交强险保护范围,严重背离了我国交强险“广覆盖”的指导思想。借鉴域外立法经验,应将交通事故责任人以外的受害人都纳入交强险的保护范围,不仅保护车下人员,还应保护车上人员；不仅保护直接受害人,还应保护间接受害人。受害第三人对保险人享有保险补偿请求权、垫付抢救费用请求权等项权利；但同时也负担通知义务、证明义务、减损义务、受领义务和协助追偿义务。第四章论述了直接请求权的行使问题。直接请求权行使的义务主体就是承保交强险的保险人以及未依法投保的投保义务人。鉴于交强险应当禁止重复投保,所以在单车肇事时赔偿的义务主体是特定的。在多车肇事时,较为合理的解决思路是依照事故责任的大小分担赔偿责任。投保了交强险的机动车,在发生保险事故(交通事故)造成损害,依法应承担赔偿责任的,保险人依据交强险合同约定向请求权人承担保险补偿责任。在我国有限的交强险资源的情况下,直接请求权的行使内容应仅限于人身损失,并且应当是物质性人身损害,即人身伤亡,而财产损失和精神性损害不应成为直接请求权的行使内容。直接请求权的行使应当受到交强险责任限额(包括总限额和各分项限额)、保险人的抗辩权以及索赔时效的限制。第五章阐述了直接请求权的司法救济问题。在司法救济过程中,各当事人的诉讼地位分别为：受害第三人是原告,致害人(被保险人)是被告,保险人应该列为共同被告。将保险人单独作为被告,或者作为无独立请求权的第三人,或者不列为诉讼参与人,甚至认为保险人的诉讼地位不确定,应随原告的意志而定等观点都存在理论上的偏差,不利于保护受害第三人的利益。受害第三人负有证明发生了交通事故,且肇事机动车已投保了交强险,自己因事故所遭受的损害等事项的举证责任,被保险人负责对受害人的过失或故意举证,保险人则要对被保险人免责或者减责的抗辩事由、受害人怠于履行减损义务而增加的损失、夸大的损失和未尽配合义务而导致的损失等抗辩理由举证。交强险在保护受害第三人的同时,也赋予保险人以追偿权,以维持当事人利益的平衡。虽然为了保障交通事故受害人的利益,法律会强制保险人垫付受害人的抢救费用,但保险人在垫付后就有权利向应当承担责任的主体追偿。目前多国和地区立法都规定了保险人的此项追偿权,我国的追偿权制度尚不健全,应在借鉴发达国家和地区先进经验的基础上进行完善。更多还原

【Abstract】 The direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance for the third victim (referred to as:the direct claims of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance) is the third victim in traffic accident, as the identity of the third body out of insurance contract, has the direct right to request compensation insurance premiums for the damage in the accident from insurers in accordance with the provisions of traffic compulsory insurance laws and regulations. The direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance is the core content of the compulsory traffic accident liability insurance system. Only when we give the direct claim to the third victim, can we truly protect the third victim for the legislative purpose. What a pity, in China’s current law "Insurance Law" and "Motor Vehicle Accidents compulsory liability insurance regulations" never introduce the direct claims of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance. Legislative defects lead to the confusion of the judicial practice standards of enforcement, which often results in two or more different verdicts in the same case and seriously damages the judicial authority. Therefore, the systematic study for the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance has important theoretical and practical significance. This paper center in the direct claim to pay high insurance and has five chapters followed in such logical idea:the value of rights-the nature of rights-the subject of rights-the right to exercise-the right to relief. What’s more, this paper studies on the related theoretical issues of the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance and tries to make recommendations to improve the legislation of the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance basing on the legislative experience of the developed countries and regions and the contrast of the theory and practice, legislative and judicial.The chapter one discusses the necessity of the direct claims of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance. Any liability insurance is the insured-centered insurance system, which is adhering to the strict separation principle and the separation of the relationship of liability for damages and liability insurance. However, the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance is the third victim-centered insurance system, which is apart from the separation principle. It is a new insurance system which carries the responsibility to protect the interests of the third victim and make the change from theoretical basis to the legislative technique. Various countries and regions have tried kinds of choices, at last they chose to confer the injured third party claims directly. We can acquire from the study of the origination and establishment of the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance:the increase of social management functions of liability insurance provides the possibility of the direct request of the insurer for victims; the reasonable correction of contract relativity laid considerable theoretical basis and justified description for the enrich and develop the interests of a third party contract theory and the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance. The development and evolution of liability insurance emphasizes the third victim’s interests, reflects people-centered concept and becomes the necessary choice of the foundation of the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance. If the third victim couldn’t gain the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance, it would be difficult to protect his legitimate interests and increase the cost of insurance claims. At the same time, the claims process maybe longer. So the completion of the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance system could also be destroyed. Endowing the direct claims for the claimant to pay compulsory traffic accident liability insurance contributes to the protection of the interests of accident victims and makes full use of its damage timely relief function, which is in line with the basic value of equity, efficiency and safety.The chapter two analyzes the legal nature of the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance. There are three kinds of theory about the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance:theory of independent nature, theory of right of claim for tort and theory of right of claim for insurance compensation. Seeing that the direct claims of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance for the third party is based on and started from right of claim for tort, and realizes through contract of compulsory insurance for traffic accident of motor-drivenvehicle. So it should be classified as right of claim for insurance compensation. Precondition of the direct claims of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance is liability for damage, and the end of this is the range of liability for damage, it is parasitical. When the direct claims of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance is competing with right of claim for damage compensation, it should be fulfilled firstly. The direct claims of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance is right of claim for insurance compensation, and it should be bound by insurance contract, the insurer should be given the defense right, when it is competing with right of claim for insurance compensation, it should be fulfilled firstly. But when insurant is prior to insurer and fulfill their obligations fully or partly, the insurant still has right of claim for insurance compensation, but the sum of the two should be within the amount of the liability insurance.The chapter three discusses the problem of subject of the direct claims of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance. The subject of the direct claims of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance is the third party victim, third party victim is combination of "victim" and "third party". For now, the compulsory traffic accident liability insurance in our country only covers the people who are not in the vehicle, and do not cover the people who are in the vehicle, which is deviates from our country’s guiding idea of "broad coverage" severely. Drawing on the experience of other extraterritorial legislation, we should include all victim, except the person who is responsible for the accident, into the scope of protection. That is to say, not only protect the direct victim, but also protect indirect victim. The third party victim has rights of claims for insurance compensation, advanced rescue cost and so on against insurer, and in the same time, he has the obligation of informing the occurrence of insured accident, proofing, lightening the damage, accepting compensation and assisting to request for compensation.The chapter four discusses the exercise of the direct claim of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance. The obligee of the direct claim is the insurance company that cover the compulsory traffic accident liability insurance and the insured obligor that is not in accordance with the insurance. Due to the insurance shall be forbidden to repeat cover, the single-car accident compensation obligation subject is specific. However, in the situation of a serial of traffic accidents, to share the damages according to the responsibility might be a reasonable solution. According to the insurance contract agreement the insurer should take the liability insurance compensation to the obligee when the compulsory traffic accident liability insurance was brought for the vehicles that caused the accident. In the situation of the limited dispute of compulsory traffic accident liability insurance in our country, the direct claim should be limited to physical and personal injury, the property loss and moral damage must not be included. The direct claim should be restricted by the compulsory third party liability insurance liability limits (Including the total amount and breakdown limit), the insurer’s right of defense and the prescription of claim. The chapter five discusses the judicial remedies of the compulsory third party liability insurance. The status of each party in the litigation includes:the victim of the third party which is the plaintiff, the infringer (or the insured) which is the defendant and the insurer which is the co-defendant. The doctrines that including named the insurer that separately as a defendant or a third party without independent claim or not a litigant participant or even deem the status of insurer depends on the will of the plaintiff are all lack of partial barge, which are not conducive to efficiency and the interests of the third party. Third party victim has the burden of proof for the occurrence of traffic accident of motor-driven vehicle and he is the victim of it, for that the motor-driven vehicle has insured by compulsory insurance for traffic accident of motor-driven vehicle of certain insurance company, for the loss he suffered from the accident and other matters. Insurer has the burden of proof for victim’s fault or intention. Insurer has the burden of proof for excuse for non-responsibility or reducing the responsibility, for that victim fails to comply the obligation of harm reduction, for exaggerate the loss, and for the loss because of his failure to do his duty on coordination and other matters.When remedying the right of claim for third party victim, traffic accident of motor-driven vehicle give the insurer recourse in order to balance the interests. While in order to protect the interests of the traffic accident victims, the law will force the insurer, who has the right to recourse for responsible party, pay the victim rescue expenses. Now the law of many countries and districts has provision of this recourse. The recourse system of our country is not perfect, and we should develop it on the base of drawing lessons from the developed countries and districts.更多还原